decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
UK Court Invalidates Samsung SEP (v Apple) | 120 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
UK Court Invalidates Samsung SEP (v Apple)
Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, March 08 2013 @ 01:01 PM EST
When the USPTO quits issuing patents on things that were state of the art in
1000 BP. Something that will occur only when one has to fluently read, write,
speak, and converse in 1000 languages, starting with A, and working up to
Zulu, before being allowed to examine patents to determine if the invention
should be granted a patent.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

UK Court Invalidates Samsung SEP (v Apple)
Authored by: N_au on Friday, March 08 2013 @ 07:48 PM EST
It never ceases to amaze me how apple doesn't infringe hardware patents that
were out before apple started making phones but all its patents are valid and
infringed.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

UK Court Invalidates Samsung SEP (v Apple)
Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, March 11 2013 @ 09:31 AM EDT
Er.

a) There's no such thing as a design patent in the UK. There are
"registered designs", which are similar. They are not patents, and the
invalidity requirements are not the same as for patents.

b) Apple *did* lose its registered design infringement case against Samsung in
the UK, in July of last year. It, and the subsequent appeal, were covered on
Groklaw in some depth.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )